Local view for "http://purl.org/linkedpolitics/eu/plenary/2000-10-25-Speech-3-296"

Predicate	Value (sorted: default)
rdf:type	lpv_eu:Speech2
dcterms:Date	"2000-10-25"^^xsd:date2
dcterms:Is Part Of	lp_eu:Endocrine disrupters2
dcterms:Language	"sv"^^xsd:language2
lpv:document identification number	"en.20001025.12.3-296"2
lpv:hasSubsequent	lp_eu:2000-10-25-Speech-3-2972
lpv:speaker	lp:Per-Arne Arvidsson2
lpv:spokenAs	member; Delegation to the EU-Czech Republic Joint Parliamentary Committee (1999-10-06--2002-01-14)3 member; Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3 member; EPP-ED (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Delegation to the European Economic Area Joint Parliamentary Committee (EEA) (1999-10-08--2002-01-14)3 unknown; Moderata samlingspartiet (1999-07-20--2004-07-19)3 substitute; Committee on Culture, Youth, Education, the Media and Sport (1999-07-21--2002-01-14)3
lpv:translated text	"Madam President, it is now our task, in our capacity as politicians, to make decisions within a very difficult area of health. I say that, despite the fact that my ordinary profession is within the area of internal medicine. Far too little is known about the mechanisms of action of endocrine disrupters. Individual variation is very great. In addition, sensitivity varies from one period to the next during the human life cycle. Therefore, we cannot follow conventional routine and establish limit values for appropriate maximum exposure, since such limit values cannot be established in the case of endocrine disrupters. In our capacity as politicians, we must take the problem of endocrine disrupters with the utmost seriousness. I consider that the Commission’s strategy document in this area is very good. We need greater knowledge, research must be given priority, risk assessment must be accelerated and possible replacement substances must be identified. We need statements from the scientific committee. The public should be given objective information. We need consultation with Member States, with industry and with a variety of organisations. To achieve this, it is reasonable for the Commission to work on the basis of a priority list. As regards the proposal on the report from the Committee on the Environment, Public Health and Consumer Policy, I have an important objection, for I do not share the view that voluntary agreements in general are not a practicable way to proceed. On the contrary, I feel that voluntary agreements can be a faster way to proceed than going down the route of legislation. Agreements such as time limits on use, restrictions on release onto the market and the phasing in of various risk-free products are often preferable when the circumstances have not been clarified, but where it is valuable to be flexible and to take measures rapidly. Finally, I would like to emphasise that the legislative methods must always be preceded by a comprehensive scientific assessment and recommendation from the scientific committee. These assessments and recommendations must be observed by us as decision makers. It is a requirement of political propriety."@en1

Named graphs describing this resource:

The resource appears as object in 2 triples

Context graph